The Effect of Activated Charcoal on Drug Exposure in Healthy Volunteers: A Meta-Analysis

Gut decontamination in the poisoned patient

Poisoning management includes gastrointestinal decontamination strategies to decrease the burden of poison entering the body and change the expected severe toxicity expected to a less toxic, more favourable outcome. Common modalities are orogastric lavage, oral-activated charcoal and whole-bowel irrigation. Endoscopic retrieval and laparotomy are rare options reserved for severe ingestions and body packers. Although supporting data are generally of low quality, gastrointestinal decontamination is likely to improve patient outcome in many situations. Unfortunately, technical limitations and contraindications can explain their infrequent use. Orogastric lavage can be useful for early lethal ingestions, albeit with significant complications such as aspiration and perforation. Activated charcoal cannot adsorb every substance. Usual dosing is 1 g/kg per dose. Whole-bowel irrigation is reserved for charged molecules or substances not adsorbed to activated charcoal but requires intact gut motility. Indications depend on several factors inherent to the ingestion (dose, time, poison) and patient's characteristics. During recent decades, studies of newer pharmaceuticals or modified-release formulations showed that significant amounts of poison, especially pharmacobezoars, persist in the gut hours postingestion, thus are amenable to gastrointestinal decontamination. Improved understanding of gut motility in volunteer studies and overdose showed clinically significant reduction in drug exposure with activated charcoal. The 1-h dogma for gastrointestinal decontamination, especially activated charcoal, is now obsolete. Clinicians must perform a risk assessment for each ingestion to determine the expected benefit at the time of decision-making, choosing the modality to achieve reduction in the toxicity burden while planning for complications or contraindications.

Effect of Activated Charcoal on Mavacamten Pharmacokinetics in Healthy Participants

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of activated charcoal on the single-dose pharmacokinetics of mavacamten when administered 2 h or 6 h after mavacamten dosing.

METHODS

In this open-label, randomized, parallel-group study, healthy adults were randomized into three groups to receive mavacamten 15 mg alone or mavacamten 15 mg plus activated charcoal 50 g administered either 2 h or 6 h after mavacamten dosing. Pharmacokinetic parameters were derived from plasma concentration-time data using noncompartmental methods.

RESULTS

Of the 45 participants randomized, 37 completed the study. When activated charcoal was administered 2 h after mavacamten dosing, mavacamten absorption and exposure were reduced compared with when mavacamten was administered alone: the area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 72 h (AUC0-72) and area under the concentration-time curve from time 0 extrapolated to infinity (AUCINF) were reduced by 14% and 34%, respectively. The maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) was also slightly lower when activated charcoal was administered 2 h after mavacamten dosing than with mavacamten alone. Pharmacokinetic profiles were similar for mavacamten alone and mavacamten plus activated charcoal administered 6 h after mavacamten dosing.

CONCLUSIONS

Activated charcoal was successful in reducing mavacamten absorption and exposure when administered as soon as possible after identification of a need for adsorption (2 h after mavacamten dosing). No change in exposure was observed when activated charcoal was administered 6 h after mavacamten dosing.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT05320094.

Management of acute carbamazepine poisoning: A narrative review

Standard management protocols are lacking and specific antidotes are unavailable for acute carbamazepine (CBZ) poisoning. The objective of this review is to provide currently available information on acute CBZ poisoning, including its management, by describing and summarizing various therapeutic methods for its treatment according to previously published studies. Several treatment methods for CBZ poisoning will be briefly introduced, their advantages and disadvantages will be analyzed and compared, and suggestions for the clinical treatment of CBZ poisoning will be provided. A literature search was performed in various English and Chinese databases. In addition, the reference lists of identified articles were screened for additional relevant studies, including non-indexed reports. Non-peer-reviewed sources were also included. In the present review, 154 articles met the inclusion criteria including case reports, case series, descriptive cohorts, pharmacokinetic studies, and in vitro studies. Data on 67 patients, including 4 fatalities, were reviewed. Based on the summary of cases reported in the included articles, the cure rate of CBZ poisoning after symptomatic treatment was 82% and the efficiency of hemoperfusion was 58.2%. Based on the literature review, CBZ is moderately dialyzable and the recommendation for CBZ poisoning is supportive management and gastric lavage. In severe cases, extracorporeal treatment is recommended, with hemodialysis as the first choice.

Acute poisoning among children and adolescents: a narrative review

Background: Acute poisoning is a frequent emergency and a significant health concern in the pediatric population. The pattern of acute intoxication differs between countries and within each country. Poisoning depends on many factors. It can be divided into two categories (accidental and intentional), and each one has its own characteristics. Aim of the study: This study aimed to analyze and discuss the overall patterns of accidental and intentional poisoning among children and adolescents. Material and methods: A systematic literature search was conducted using Google Scholar, Elsevier, and the PubMed database. The following keywords were used: “acute poisoning”, “pediatric poisoning”, “intentional poisonings”, “unintentional poisonings”, and “suicide attempts”. Results: A total of 38 articles were included in the review. Half had been published in the last five years. The analysis focused on the characteristics of the materials and methods, results, and conclusions sections of each study. Conclusions: Unintentional poisonings dominate among younger children, with a slight male predominance. They usually occur at home and occasionally lead to severe harm or even death. The most common causes of intoxication in this population are medications and household products. The majority of poisonings among adolescents are intentional suicide attempts. Among older children, over-the-counter analgesics are the most common cause of acute poisoning. Accidental poisoning can be avoided by providing preventive educational programs to guardians and replacing potentially toxic household products with safer ones. The prevention of intentional poisoning should be based on a community support system and behavioral programs. Healthcare professionals should be familiar with poisoning and be aware of the different patterns of intoxication according to age and gender.

Systematic review on the use of activated charcoal for gastrointestinal decontamination following acute oral overdose

INTRODUCTION

The use of activated charcoal in poisoning remains both a pillar of modern toxicology and a source of debate. Following the publication of the joint position statements on the use of single-dose and multiple-dose activated charcoal by the American Academy of Clinical Toxicology and the European Association of Poison Centres and Clinical Toxicologists, the routine use of activated charcoal declined. Over subsequent years, many new pharmaceuticals became available in modified or alternative-release formulations and additional data on gastric emptying time in poisoning was published, challenging previous assumptions about absorption kinetics. The American Academy of Clinical Toxicology, the European Association of Poison Centres and Clinical Toxicologists and the Asia Pacific Association of Medical Toxicology founded the Clinical Toxicology Recommendations Collaborative to create a framework for evidence-based recommendations for the management of poisoned patients. The activated charcoal workgroup of the Clinical Toxicology Recommendations Collaborative was tasked with reviewing systematically the evidence pertaining to the use of activated charcoal in poisoning in order to update the previous recommendations.

OBJECTIVES

The main objective was: Does oral activated charcoal given to adults or children prevent toxicity or improve clinical outcome and survival of poisoned patients compared to those who do not receive charcoal?  Secondary objectives were to evaluate pharmacokinetic outcomes, the role of cathartics, and adverse events to charcoal administration. This systematic review summarizes the available evidence on the efficacy of activated charcoal.

METHODS

A medical librarian created a systematic search strategy for Medline (Ovid), subsequently translated for Embase (via Ovid), CINAHL (via EBSCO), BIOSIS Previews (via Ovid), Web of Science, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library/DARE. All databases were searched from inception to December 31, 2019. There were no language limitations.  One author screened all citations identified in the search based on predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria. Excluded citations were confirmed by an additional author and remaining articles were obtained in full text and evaluated by at least two authors for inclusion. All authors cross-referenced full-text articles to identify articles missed in the searches. Data from included articles were extracted by the authors on a standardized spreadsheet and two authors used the GRADE methodology to independently assess the quality and risk of bias of each included study.

RESULTS

From 22,950 titles originally identified, the final data set consisted of 296 human studies, 118 animal studies, and 145 in vitro studies. Also included were 71 human and two animal studies that reported adverse events. The quality was judged to have a Low or Very Low GRADE in 469 (83%) of the studies. Ninety studies were judged to be of Moderate or High GRADE. The higher GRADE studies reported on the following drugs: paracetamol (acetaminophen), phenobarbital, carbamazepine, cardiac glycosides (digoxin and oleander), ethanol, iron, salicylates, theophylline, tricyclic antidepressants, and valproate. Data on newer pharmaceuticals not reviewed in the previous American Academy of Clinical Toxicology/European Association of Poison Centres and Clinical Toxicologists statements such as quetiapine, olanzapine, citalopram, and Factor Xa inhibitors were included. No studies on the optimal dosing for either single-dose or multiple-dose activated charcoal were found. In the reviewed clinical data, the time of administration of the first dose of charcoal was beyond one hour in 97% (n = 1006 individuals), beyond two hours in 36% (n = 491 individuals), and beyond 12 h in 4% (n = 43 individuals) whereas the timing of the first dose in controlled studies was within one hour of ingestion in 48% (n = 2359 individuals) and beyond two hours in 36% (n = 484) of individuals.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review found heterogenous data. The higher GRADE data was focused on a few select poisonings, while studies that addressed patients with unknown and or mixed ingestions were hampered by low rates of clinically meaningful toxicity or death.  Despite these limitations, they reported a benefit of activated charcoal beyond one hour in many clinical scenarios.

Intestinal Excretion, Intestinal Recirculation, and Renal Tubule Reabsorption Are Underappreciated Mechanisms That Drive the Distribution and Pharmacokinetic Behavior of Small Molecule Drugs

Drug reabsorption following biliary excretion is well-known as enterohepatic recirculation (EHR). Renal tubular reabsorption (RTR) following renal excretion is also common but not easily assessed. Intestinal excretion (IE) and enteroenteric recirculation (EER) have not been recognized as common disposition mechanisms for metabolically stable and permeable drugs. IE and intestinal reabsorption (IR:EHR/EER), as well as RTR, are governed by dug concentration gradients, passive diffusion, active transport, and metabolism, and together they markedly impact disposition and pharmacokinetics (PK) of small molecule drugs. Disruption of IE, IR, or RTR through applications of active charcoal (AC), transporter knockout (KO), and transporter inhibitors can lead to changes in PK parameters. The impacts of intestinal and renal reabsorption on PK are under-appreciated. Although IE and EER/RTR can be an intrinsic drug property, there is no apparent strategy to optimize compounds based on this property. This review seeks to improve understanding and applications of IE, IR, and RTR mechanisms.

A Colon-Targeted Adsorbent (DAV132) Does Not Affect the Pharmacokinetics of Warfarin or Clonazepam in Healthy Subjects

DAV132 is a novel colon-targeted adsorbent that prevents the deleterious impact of antibiotics on gut microbiota without modifying their systemic availability. A randomized, Latin-square crossover, open-label trial with 2 substudies in 18 and 24 healthy volunteers evaluated the pharmacokinetic (PK) bioequivalence of warfarin, a drug with a narrow therapeutic index (NTI), and clonazepam, both widely used for the treatment of chronic conditions, with or without coadministration of DAV132 7.5 g. PK parameters observed with single doses of 5 mg warfarin and 1 mg clonazepam when administered alone did not differ with the PK parameters when administered concomitantly with or 1 hour before DAV132. Geometric mean ratios (GMRs) for S-warfarin, R-warfarin, and clonazepam C_max were 102.0, 102.8, and 91.9, respectively, after concomitant administration and 106.5, 107.5, and 95.0, respectively, when administered 1 hour before DAV132. After concomitant administration, GMRs for S-warfarin, R-warfarin, and clonazepam AUC_last were 100.5, 100.2, and 94.9, respectively, and 101.9, 101.8, and 101.3, respectively, when administered 1 hour before DAV132. All GMR 90% confidence intervals fell within the prespecified 80% to 125% limit for bioequivalence, indicating a lack of drug-drug interaction. In conclusion, DAV132 did not affect the systemic exposure of 2 NTI drugs absorbed in the proximal intestine.

The effect of activated charcoal on drug exposure following intravenous administration: A meta-analysis

Activated charcoal both reduces primary drug absorption and enhances drug elimination. However, the two mechanisms of action overlap and are indistinguishable from each other. In order to estimate the extend of enhanced elimination, we summarized the effect of activated charcoal on intravenously administered drugs, where reduced drug exposure can be attributed to enhanced elimination. We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies evaluating the effect of orally administered activated charcoal on the systemic exposure of intravenously administered drugs. We searched the bibliographic databases PubMed, Embase and Cochrane. Meta-regression analyses of selected physiochemical drug properties on the effect sizes of activated charcoal were performed. All but one of 21 included studies used multiple-dose activated charcoal (MDAC). MDAC reduced the median half-life of the intravenously administered study drugs by 45.7% (interquartile range: 15.3%-51.3%) and area under the concentration time curve by 47.0% (interquartile range: 36.4%-50.2%). MDAC significantly improved drug elimination across nine different intravenously administered drugs, but we were unable to identify factors allowing extrapolation to other drugs. The results offer a possible and plausible rationale for the previously observed effects of single-dose activated charcoal beyond the timeframe where ingested drug is present in the gastro-intestinal tract.

Management of pharmaceutical and recreational drug poisoning

BACKGROUND

Poisoning is one of the leading causes of admission to the emergency department and intensive care unit. A large number of epidemiological changes have occurred over the last years such as the exponential growth of new synthetic psychoactive substances. Major progress has also been made in analytical screening and assays, enabling the clinicians to rapidly obtain a definite diagnosis.

METHODS

A committee composed of 30 experts from five scientific societies, the Société de Réanimation de Langue Française (SRLF), the Société Française de Médecine d'Urgence (SFMU), the Société de Toxicologie Clinique (STC), the Société Française de Toxicologie Analytique (SFTA) and the Groupe Francophone de Réanimation et d'Urgences Pédiatriques (GFRUP) evaluated eight fields: (1) severity assessment and initial triage; (2) diagnostic approach and role of toxicological analyses; (3) supportive care; (4) decontamination; (5) elimination enhancement; (6) place of antidotes; (7) specificities related to recreational drug poisoning; and (8) characteristics of cardiotoxicant poisoning. Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome (PICO) questions were reviewed and updated as needed, and evidence profiles were generated. Analysis of the literature and formulation of recommendations were then conducted according to the GRADE® methodology.

RESULTS

The SRLF-SFMU guideline panel provided 41 statements concerning the management of pharmaceutical and recreational drug poisoning. Ethanol and chemical poisoning were excluded from the scope of these recommendations. After two rounds of discussion and various amendments, a strong consensus was reached for all recommendations. Six of these recommendations had a high level of evidence (GRADE 1±) and six had a low level of evidence (GRADE 2±). Twenty-nine recommendations were in the form of expert opinion recommendations due to the low evidences in the literature.

CONCLUSIONS

The experts reached a substantial consensus for several strong recommendations for optimal management of pharmaceutical and recreational drug poisoning, mainly regarding the conditions and effectiveness of naloxone and N-acetylcystein as antidotes to treat opioid and acetaminophen poisoning, respectively.

The Use of Activated Charcoal to Treat Intoxications

BACKGROUND

In 2016, according to the German Federal Statistical Office, 178 425 cases of intoxication (poisoning) were treated in German hospitals. The poison control centers in the German-speaking countries gave advice in a total of 268 787 instances of poisoning in that year, and use of activated charcoal was recommended in 4.37% of cases. The application of activated charcoal plays a major role in both primary and secondary detoxification. This article serves as an overview of the mechanism of action, indications, contraindications, modes of application, and dosing of activated charcoal.

METHODS

This review is based on pertinent publications retrieved by a selective search in PubMed. The opinions of experts from the poison control centers in the German-speaking countries were considered in the interpretation of the data.

RESULTS

The administration of activated charcoal is indicated to treat moderately severe to life-threatening intoxication. It should be carried out as soon as possible, within the first hour of the ingestion; timed-release preparations can be given up to 6 hours after the ingestion. An important contraindication is impaired consciousness with the danger of aspiration in a patient whose air- way has not yet been secured. Activated charcoal is ineffective or inadequately effective in cases of poisoning with acids or bases, alcohols, organic solvents, inorganic salts, or metals. The proper dosage consists of an amount that is 10 to 40 times as much as that of the intoxicating substance, or else 0.5-1 g/kg body weight in children or 50 g in adults. Repeated application is indicated for intoxications with agents that persist for a longer time in the stomach and for intoxications with timed-release drugs or drugs with a marked enterohepatic or entero-enteric circulation. The routine combination of activated charcoal with a laxative is not recommended.

CONCLUSION

Even though intoxications are common, there is still no internationally valid guideline concerning the administration of activated charcoal. A precise analysis of the risks and benefits is needed for each administration, and a poison control center should be consulted for this purpose.

Drug-encapsulated carbon (DECON): A novel platform for enhanced drug delivery

Current drug-delivery systems are designed primarily for parenteral applications and are either lipid or polymer drug conjugates. In our quest to inhibit herpes simplex virus infection via the compounds found in commonly used cosmetic products, we found that activated carbon particles inhibit infection and, in addition, substantially improve topical delivery and, hence, the efficacy of a common antiviral drug, acyclovir (ACV). Our in vitro studies demonstrate that highly porous carbon structures trapped virions, blocked infection and substantially improved efficacy when ACV was loaded onto them. Also, using murine models of corneal and genital herpes infections, we show that the topical use of drug-encapsulated carbon (DECON) reduced dosing frequency, shortened treatment duration, and exhibited higher therapeutic efficacy than currently approved topical or systemic antivirals alone. DECON is a nontoxic, cost-effective and nonimmunogenic alternative to current topical drug-delivery systems that is uniquely triggered for drug release by virus trapping.

First aid interventions by laypeople for acute oral poisoning

BACKGROUND

Oral poisoning is a major cause of mortality and disability worldwide, with estimates of over 100,000 deaths due to unintentional poisoning each year and an overrepresentation of children below five years of age. Any effective intervention that laypeople can apply to limit or delay uptake or to evacuate, dilute or neutralize the poison before professional help arrives may limit toxicity and save lives.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of pre-hospital interventions (alone or in combination) for treating acute oral poisoning, available to and feasible for laypeople before the arrival of professional help.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, ISI Web of Science, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and three clinical trials registries to 11 May 2017, and we also carried out reference checking and citation searching.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials comparing interventions (alone or in combination) that are feasible in a pre-hospital setting for treating acute oral poisoning patients, including but potentially not limited to activated charcoal (AC), emetics, cathartics, diluents, neutralizing agents and body positioning.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently performed study selection, data collection and assessment. Primary outcomes of this review were incidence of mortality and adverse events, plus incidence and severity of symptoms of poisoning. Secondary outcomes were duration of symptoms of poisoning, drug absorption, and incidence of hospitalization and ICU admission.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 24 trials involving 7099 participants. Using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool, we assessed no study as being at low risk of bias for all domains. Many studies were poorly reported, so the risk of selection and detection biases were often unclear. Most studies reported important outcomes incompletely, and we judged them to be at high risk of reporting bias.All but one study enrolled oral poisoning patients in an emergency department; the remaining study was conducted in a pre-hospital setting. Fourteen studies included multiple toxic syndromes or did not specify, while the other studies specifically investigated paracetamol (2 studies), carbamazepine (2 studies), tricyclic antidepressant (2 studies), yellow oleander (2 studies), benzodiazepine (1 study), or toxic berry intoxication (1 study). Eighteen trials investigated the effects of activated charcoal (AC), administered as a single dose (SDAC) or in multiple doses (MDAC), alone or in combination with other first aid interventions (a cathartic) and/or hospital treatments. Six studies investigated syrup of ipecac plus other first aid interventions (SDAC + cathartic) versus ipecac alone. The collected evidence was mostly of low to very low certainty, often downgraded for indirectness, risk of bias or imprecision due to low numbers of events.First aid interventions that limit or delay the absorption of the poison in the bodyWe are uncertain about the effect of SDAC compared to no intervention on the incidence of adverse events in general (zero events in both treatment groups; 1 study, 451 participants) or vomiting specifically (Peto odds ratio (OR) 4.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.30 to 57.26, 1 study, 25 participants), ICU admission (Peto OR 7.77, 95% CI 0.15 to 391.93, 1 study, 451 participants) and clinical deterioration (zero events in both treatment groups; 1 study, 451 participants) in participants with mixed types or paracetamol poisoning, as all evidence for these outcomes was of very low certainty. No studies assessed SDAC for mortality, duration of symptoms, drug absorption or hospitalization.Only one study compared SDAC to syrup of ipecac in participants with mixed types of poisoning, providing very low-certainty evidence. Therefore we are uncertain about the effects on Glasgow Coma Scale scores (mean difference (MD) -0.15, 95% CI -0.43 to 0.13, 1 study, 34 participants) or incidence of adverse events (risk ratio (RR) 1.24, 95% CI 0.26 to 5.83, 1 study, 34 participants). No information was available concerning mortality, duration of symptoms, drug absorption, hospitalization or ICU admission.This review also considered the added value of SDAC or MDAC to hospital interventions, which mostly included gastric lavage. No included studies investigated the use of body positioning in oral poisoning patients.First aid interventions that evacuate the poison from the gastrointestinal tractWe found one study comparing ipecac versus no intervention in toxic berry ingestion in a pre-hospital setting. Low-certainty evidence suggests there may be an increase in the incidence of adverse events, but the study did not report incidence of mortality, incidence or duration of symptoms of poisoning, drug absorption, hospitalization or ICU admission (103 participants).In addition, we also considered the added value of syrup of ipecac to SDAC plus a cathartic and the added value of a cathartic to SDAC.No studies used cathartics as an individual intervention.First aid interventions that neutralize or dilute the poison No included studies investigated the neutralization or dilution of the poison in oral poisoning patients.The review also considered combinations of different first aid interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The studies included in this review provided mostly low- or very low-certainty evidence about the use of first aid interventions for acute oral poisoning. A key limitation was the fact that only one included study actually took place in a pre-hospital setting, which undermines our confidence in the applicability of these results to this setting. Thus, the amount of evidence collected was insufficient to draw any conclusions.

Clinical Effects of Activated Charcoal Unavailability on Treatment Outcomes for Oral Drug Poisoned Patients

Background

Activated charcoal is the most frequently and widely used oral decontaminating agent in emergency departments (EDs). However, there is some debate about its clinical benefits and risks. In Korea, activated charcoal with sorbitol was unavailable as of the mid-2015, and our hospital had been unable to use it from September 2015. This study examined the differences of clinical features and outcomes of patients during the periods charcoal was and was not available.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the electronic medical records of patients who had visited an urban tertiary academic ED for oral drug poisoning between January 2013 and January 2017.

Results

For the charcoal-available period, 413 patients were identified and for the charcoal-unavailable period, 221. Activated charcoal was used in the treatment of 141 patients (34%) during the available period. The mortality rates during the available and unavailable periods were 1.9 and 0.9%, respectively (p = 0.507). There was also no interperiod difference in the development of aspiration pneumonia (9.9 versus 9.5%, p = 0.864), the endotracheal intubation rate (8.4 versus 7.2%, p = 0.586), and vasopressor use (5.3 versus 5.0%, p = 0.85). Intensive care unit (ICU) admission was higher in the unavailable period (5.8 versus 13.6%, p = 0.001). ICU days were lower in the unavailable period (10 [4.5-19] versus 4 [3-9], p = 0.01). Hospital admission (43.3 versus 29.9%, p = 0.001) was lower in the unavailable period.

Conclusions

In this single center study, there appeared to be no difference in mortality, intubation rates, or vasopressor use between the charcoal-available and charcoal-unavailable periods.

Retrospective study of paracetamol poisoning in children aged zero to six years found no cases of liver injury

AIM

This study focused on children aged zero to six years with suspected single-dose paracetamol poisoning, which has not been investigated in Denmark. We evaluated the incidence of liver injuries and the use of activated charcoal and N-acetylcysteine treatment.

METHODS

Our retrospective study was performed in three paediatric hospital centres from 2001 to 2012. Data on symptoms, time of ingestion, blood biochemistry, treatment and adverse reactions were collected. The results were evaluated against the Rumack-Matthew nomogram.

RESULTS

We identified 221 children (58% male), with a mean age of 2.67 ± 1.05 years. Activated charcoal treatment was given in 87% of cases, but only 15% of the children received treatment within one hour of the suspected paracetamol poisoning. Although 80% of the children received N-acetylcysteine treatment, only one case (0.5%) had a toxic plasma paracetamol level according to the treatment nomogram. Abdominal pain or vomiting was associated with higher paracetamol levels in plasma. None of the children developed liver injuries.

CONCLUSION

We found a low incidence of significant poisoning and liberal use of N-acetylcysteine and activated charcoal treatment in Danish children aged zero to six years with suspected paracetamol poisoning. Vomiting or abdominal pain was associated with elevated plasma paracetamol levels. No liver injuries were reported.

Activated Charcoal Haemoperfusion in the Treatment of Experimental Amitriptyline Poisoning in Pigs - The Effect on Amitriptyline Plasma Concentration and Haemodynamic Parameters

Coated activated charcoal haemoperfusion (CAC-HP) is a well-known treatment modality. Case reports have revealed conflicting results about the efficacy of CAC-HP in the treatment of amitriptyline (AT) poisoning, and no randomized clinical trials have been identified in the literature. This study aimed at quantifying the efficacy of modern CAC-HP as an adjunctive treatment of AT intoxication compared with standard care alone. Fourteen female Danish landrace pigs were randomized to either standard care or standard care plus 4 hr of CAC-HP. The pigs were anaesthetized, and vital parameters were continuously recorded. Amitriptyline infusion (7.5 mg/kg) was completed in 20 min. Thirty minutes after AT infusion, activated charcoal was instilled orally in both groups. In the intervention group, CAC-HP was initiated 60 min. after AT infusion. Blood and urine samples were collected as were vital parameters at specific time intervals. The protocol was approved by the Danish Experimental Animal Expectorate and complied with the NIH guide for care and use of laboratory animals. Data were managed according to the ARRIVE guidelines. No statistical significant differences between intervention and control groups were found when analysing for differences in AT levels in plasma at any time-point. Furthermore, significant differences between the control and intervention groups in regard to vital parameters could not be found either. In our animal model, the addition of CAC-HP did not improve the clearance of AT compared with standard treatment alone. We suggest that the effect of modern CAC-HP as a treatment modality in AT-poisoned human patients may be inadequate.

Single dose activated charcoal for gut decontamination: Application by medical non-professionals -a prospective study on availability and practicability

Context

Oral activated charcoal (AC) for toxin absorption should be applied as soon as possible. Extra-hospital AC-application on site by medical laypersons with pre-emptive obtained AC may save time, but may be inferior to AC-application by medical professionals.

Objective

1) Availability and incidence of pre-emptive stockpiling of AC on site in the German region Bavaria 2) time saved by AC-stockpiling and application on site, 3) quality of AC-application defined by completeness of the applied AC-dose, time needed, incidence of side-effects in lay-care and in professional-care, considering confounding variables: AC-formulation/powder/tablets, recommended AC-dose, patient’s age.

Method

telephone-interviews in cases with AC-recommendation by a Poison Information Centre (PIC). Lay-care was suggested according to risk-assessment by PIC. Ingestion sites were classified as either apt for AC-stockpiling or not apt.

Results

1) availability: In Bavaria only 20%–22% of eligible cases had AC on-hand, 2) time-saving was at least 14 min. 3) Lay-care/professional-care or patient’s age had no significant influence on the completeness of the applied AC-dose, which was higher with AC as powder but negatively correlated with the recommended AC-dose. No significant difference was seen with time needed for application and incidence of side-effects.

Conclusion

pre-emptive AC-stocking should be encouraged.

Activated charcoal for acute overdose: a reappraisal

Sometimes mistakenly characterized as a 'universal antidote,' activated charcoal (AC) is the most frequently employed method of gastrointestinal decontamination in the developed world. Typically administered as a single dose (SDAC), its tremendous surface area permits the binding of many drugs and toxins in the gastrointestinal lumen, reducing their systemic absorption. Like other decontamination procedures, the utility of SDAC attenuates with time, and, although generally safe, it is not free of risk. A large body of evidence demonstrates that SDAC can reduce the absorption of drugs and xenobiotics but most such studies involve volunteers and have little generalizability to clinical practice. Few rigorous clinical trials of SDAC have been conducted, and none validate or refute its utility in those patients who are intuitively most likely to benefit. Over the past decade, a growing body of observational data have demonstrated that SDAC can elicit substantial reductions in drug absorption in acutely poisoned patients. The challenge for clinicians rests in differentiating those patients most likely to benefit from SDAC from those in whom meaningful improvement is doubtful. This is often a difficult determination not well suited to an algorithmic approach. The present narrative review summarizes the data supporting the benefits and harms of SDAC, and offers pragmatic suggestions for clinical practice.

Noncardiogenic Pulmonary Edema after Amlodipine Overdose without Refractory Hypotension and Bradycardia

Amlodipine overdose can be life-threatening when manifesting as noncardiogenic pulmonary edema. Treatment remains challenging. We describe a case of noncardiogenic pulmonary edema without refractory hypotension and bradycardia after ingestion of 500 milligram amlodipine with suicidal intent. Mechanical ventilation, dexamethasone, atrovent HFA (ipratropium), pulmicort inhalation, and antibiotic therapy were used for the management. Length of hospital stay was 11 days. The patient was discharged with full recovery.

An exploratory study; the therapeutic effects of premixed activated charcoal-sorbitol administration in patients poisoned with organophosphate pesticide

OBJECTIVE

The effects of activated charcoal (AC) mixed with cathartics for gastric decontamination in the management of organophosphate (OP) poisoning remain unknown due to limited clinical evidence. This exploratory study assessed the effectiveness of premixed AC-sorbitol as a treatment for OP poisoning.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective observational case study included patients who either did not receive AC-sorbitol or received a single dose of AC-sorbitol within 24 h after OP ingestion. The patients were divided into three groups: no AC-sorbitol treatment, patients who received AC-sorbitol within 1 h of OP ingestion, and patients who received AC-sorbitol more than 1 h after OP ingestion. Mortality, the development of respiratory failure, and the duration of mechanical ventilation were used as outcome measurements for effectiveness, whereas aspiration pneumonia and electrolyte imbalance were employed as safety measurements.

RESULT

Among 262 patients with OP poisoning, 198 were included. Of these, 133 patients did not receive AC-sorbitol, whereas 14 and 51 patients received AC-sorbitol within 1 h or more than 1 h after ingestion, respectively. The time from ingestion to hospital arrival and time from ingestion to administration of atropine and pralidoxime differed among the groups, whereas other characteristics, including age, amount ingested, and type of ingested OP, were similar among the groups. Univariate and multivariate analysis demonstrated that the administration of AC-sorbitol was not associated with outcome measures for effectiveness and did not significantly increase either aspiration pneumonia or electrolyte imbalances during hospitalization.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

The administration of AC-sorbitol exerted neither beneficial nor harmful effects on the outcomes of OP-poisoned patients regardless of the time from OP ingestion to administration, compared with those of patients who did not receive AC-sorbitol. However, this study enrolled a small number of patients who received AC-sorbitol; further qualified trials with a sufficient number of patients are therefore needed.

Indications for single-dose activated charcoal administration in acute overdose

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Gastrointestinal decontamination in overdose patients remains a controversial problem in emergency medicine. There has been a significant decrease in the use of single-dose activated charcoal (SDAC) in recent years based on little new evidence and possibly because the overall mortality in overdose patients is low.

RECENT FINDINGS

Human volunteer studies suggest SDAC is effective and this effect occurs for up to 4 h after ingestion, but the magnitude of the reduction in area under the curve (AUC) decreases over time. Two randomized controlled trials including one recent large study did not find SDAC to be beneficial. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic studies of specific drugs in overdose suggest that for most drugs SDAC decreases drug exposure, but this does not translate to clinical benefit in all cases. The administration of SDAC is a low-risk intervention.

SUMMARY

Although SDAC is unlikely to be beneficial in many overdose patients, for some subgroups with severe poisoning, the benefits will outweigh the low risk of administration. The use of SDAC should be based on the potential toxicity of the drug ingested and the potential benefit of SDAC balanced against the willingness of the patient to take SDAC and the low risk of administration.

Does prearrival communication from a poison center to an emergency department decrease time to activated charcoal for pediatric poisoning?

OBJECTIVE

A poison center plays an important role in directing appropriate care, which is critical in reducing morbidity due to poisoning. Activated charcoal (AC) is one intervention for some poisonings. This study examined whether children with a poisoning who were preannounced by a poison center received AC earlier than patients without a referral.

METHODS

A retrospective review of AC administration in children aged 0 to 18 years in a pediatric emergency department (ED) from 2000 to 2006 was performed. Abstracted covariates were poison center referral status, age, sex, acuity, disposition, transportation mode, triage time, and time of AC administration. Analysis of variance controlling for covariates tested the equality of mean time intervals between the groups with and without a poison center referral.

RESULTS

Three hundred fifty-one cases met the inclusion criteria. One hundred thirty-five (39%) were male. Eighty cases (23%) had a poison center referral. Time from triage to charcoal administration for patients with a poison center referral was a mean of 59 (SD, 34) minutes. Time for the group without a referral was a mean of 71 (SD, 43) minutes (P = 0.0036).

CONCLUSIONS

Advanced communication from a poison center was associated with earlier administration of AC in the ED for this population. Nevertheless, the duration to charcoal administration was frequently suboptimal. Triage and prehospital practices should be reexamined to improve timeliness of AC when indicated and consider exclusion of administration if beyond an appropriate time frame. Advanced notification should be the paradigm for all poison centers, and early response protocols for poison center referrals should be used by EDs.

Gastrointestinal decontamination in the acutely poisoned patient

Objective

To define the role of gastrointestinal (GI) decontamination of the poisoned patient.

Data Sources

A computer-based PubMed/MEDLINE search of the literature on GI decontamination in the poisoned patient with cross referencing of sources.

Study Selection and Data Extraction

Clinical, animal and in vitro studies were reviewed for clinical relevance to GI decontamination of the poisoned patient.

Data Synthesis

The literature suggests that previously, widely used, aggressive approaches including the use of ipecac syrup, gastric lavage, and cathartics are now rarely recommended. Whole bowel irrigation is still often recommended for slow-release drugs, metals, and patients who "pack" or "stuff" foreign bodies filled with drugs of abuse, but with little quality data to support it. Activated charcoal (AC), single or multiple doses, was also a previous mainstay of GI decontamination, but the utility of AC is now recognized to be limited and more time dependent than previously practiced. These recommendations have resulted in several treatment guidelines that are mostly based on retrospective analysis, animal studies or small case series, and rarely based on randomized clinical trials.

Conclusions

The current literature supports limited use of GI decontamination of the poisoned patient.